Primordial Prescription: The Most Plaguing Problem of Life Origin Science

By David L. Abel

This is the second major work by this author (The First Gene: The Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control) and it addresses the most fundamental questions remaining for life origin research: How did molecular evolution generate metabolic recipe and instructions using a representational symbol system? How did prebiotic nature set all of the many configurable switch-settings to integrate so many interdependent circuits? How did inanimate nature sequence nucleotides to spell instructions to the ribosomes on how to sequence amino acids into correctly folding protein molecular machines? How did nature then code these symbol-system instructions into Hamming block codes, to reduce noise pollution in the Shannon channel? What programmed the error-detection and error-correcting software that keeps life from quickly deteriorating into non-life from so many deleterious mutations? In short, which of the four known forces of physics organized and prescribed life into existence? Was it gravity? Was it the strong or weak nuclear force? Was it the electromagnetic force? How could any combination of these natural forces and force fields program decision nodes to prescribe future utility? Why and how would a prebiotic environment value, desire or seek to generate utility? Can chance and/or necessity (law) program or prescribe sophisticated biofunction? The most plaguing problem of life origin science remains: What programmed, in a prebiotic environment, the Primordial Prescription and Processing of such sophisticated, integrated biofunction? That is the subject of this book.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Greg McElveen
• Release date: Apr 15, 2015
• ISBN: 9780965798839

David L. Abel

Dr. Abel is a life-origin specialist with scores of peer-reviewed science journal publications. He is the Editor of "The First Gene: The Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control." Dr. Abel is the Director of the Gene Emergence Project of the Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc. His specialties are Proto-Biocybernetics and Proto-Biosemiotics.

Book preview

Primordial Prescription:

The Most Plaguing Problem

of Life Origin Science

Dr. Abel is a life-origin specialist with scores of peer-reviewed science journal publications. He is the Editor of The First Gene: The Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control. Dr. Abel is the Director of the Gene Emergence Project of the Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc. His specialties are Proto-Biocybernetics and Proto-Biosemiotics.

Primordial

Prescription:

The Most Plaguing Problem

of Life Origin Science

David L. Abel

Director, The Gene Emergence Project,

Department of ProtoBioCybernetics and ProtoBioSemiotics,

The Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc.

LongView Press–Academic New York, N.Y.

Copyright © 2015 by David L. Abel. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of LongView Press™ or the author, said permission being obtained from the writer. Contact Info: David L. Abel, Program Director, The Gene Emergence Project™: An international consortium of scientists investigating protocell control mechanisms. Department of ProtoBioCybernetics/ProtoBioSemiotics, The Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc. www.lifeorigin.org / email: [e-mail]

Library of Congress Control Number Print Version: 2015932686

Library of Congress Subject Heading Suggestions:

BISAC Classification Suggestions:

ISBN-Print Edition: 978-0-9657988-2-2     V 1.0     ISBN-eBook Edition: 978-0-9657988-3-9

Abel, David L. 1946 —

Primordial Prescription: the Most Plaguing Problem of Life Origin Science

David L. Abel. Includes bibliographic references and index

LongView Press™—Academic, 2015

244 5th Avenue, Suite # G228, New York, NY 10001-7604

Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper

Dedication

To Morris Wayne Hedge,

A lifelong friend, best man,

mathematician, scholar,

editor, patriot and

Chairman of the Board of the

Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Dedication

Preface

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Section

1.The Most Plaguing Problem of Life Origin Science

It’s not about information. It’s about Prescription, and its Processing.

1.1.What exactly is prescription?

1.2.Prescription of what?

1.3.Information itself doesn’t do anything.

1.4.Information discussions only lead to a quagmire.

2. What does Prescription require?

2.1.Prescription, unless we pioneer it, has to be instructed with prior purposeful choices

2.2.Prescription includes not only Instructions (Prescriptive Information [PI]), but the processing of those instructions.

2.3.The processing of Prescriptive Information (PI) itself requires PI.

2.4.Prescription comes in many forms

2.4.1.Instructions/directions (typically using semantic language expressed using a formal symbol system.)

2.4.1.1Non-material Symbol Systems

2.4.1.2Material Symbol Systems

2.4.2Programming (e.g., the theoretical Turing tape)

2.4.3Pre-set configurable switch-settings in an integrated circuit (e.g., chips, circuit boards)

2.4.4The integration/organization of component parts into a holistic Sustained Functional System (SFS)

2.4.5The design/engineering/manufacturing of those individual component parts needed to construct any non-trivial machine.

2.4.6Pre-programmed degrees of end-user freedom of choice

2.5Prescription and its processing invariably pursues the goal of function

2.6Prescription can only be verified through successful realization of utility

2.7Prescription requires contingency. But, there are two kinds of contingency [The Universal Contingency Dichotomy (UCD)]:

2.7.1Chance contingency

2.7.2Choice contingency: Choice-Contingent Causation and Control (CCCC)

2.8The Prescription Principle: Prescription requires Choice Contingency

2.9The first step towards prescribing utility is usually organization.

2.10Organization requires choice contingency at decision nodes

2.11Prescription is a function of Decision Theory, not Stochastic Theory.

2.12Formalism vs. Physicality. What exactly is formalism?

2.12.1Physicodynamic Determinism (PD)

2.12.2Formalism and its inherent Choice Determinism (CD)

2.13Prescription always emanates from the far formal side of the great divide known as The Cybernetic Cut

2.14Prescription always flows across on the one-way Configurable Switch (CS) Bridge from formalism to physicality.

2.15The fundamental unit of Prescriptive Choice (PC) is the binary decision node.

2.16Can programming choices be measured with fixed units of measurement?

2.17Both PI, and the processing of PI, require Mind and Agency

2.17.1Self-awareness

2.17.2Valuation, Desire and Motivation

2.17.3Intention and the Pursuit of functionality

2.17.4The choice contingency needed to achieve formal utility

2.17.5Knowledge of/about ontologic being (objective reality)

3.How did primordial prescription and its processing arise in a prebiotic environment?

3.1The chance and necessity of nature are blind to function and usefulness.

3.2No yet-to-be discovered law could possibly prescribe sophisticated function.

3.3The Universal Selection Dichotomy (USD)

3.3.1Selection FROM AMONG

3.3.2Selection FOR (in pursuit of)

3.4Natural Selection

3.4.1Which of the two categories of Selection might have been exercised by molecular evolution?

3.4.2Which of the two categories of Selection would have been exercised by post-biotic evolution?

3.4.3The GS Principle (The Genetic Selection Principle)

3.5Molecular evolution offers only two possible kinds of fitness

3.5.1Greater molecular stability

3.5.2Mutual or self-replication

3.6Selection Pressure

3.7Directed Evolution

3.8Evolutionary algorithms

3.9Ontological vs. Epistemological Prescription and Processing (P & P)

3.10Can Ontological Prescription, and its processing increase in nature?

3.11Chaos theory’s self-ordering cannot produce formal organization or nontrivial function.

3.11.1Dissipative structures dissipate!

3.11.2The relation of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics to ontologic prescription and its processing.

3.11.3A cell is a Sustained Functional System (SFS)

3.11.4A thermodynamically open environment is not sufficient to generate an SFS

3.11.5Entropy is better understood as disorganization than disorder.

3.12Constraints vs. Controls

3.13Laws vs. Rules

3.14The Universal Determinism Dichotomy (UDD): Physicodynamic Determinism vs. Choice Determinism

3.14.1Physicodynamic Determinism (PD)

3.14.2Choice Determinism (CD)

3.15Complexity does not equal abstract concept, organization or functionality.

3.16The Formalism > Physicality Principle (F > P Principle)

3.17No targets existed in a prebiotic environment, and no searches were conducted

3.18Intuitive work vs. the physics definition of work.

3.18.1Physics definition of work. A tumble weed blown up hill is not intuitive, useful work

3.18.2Intuitive, useful work

3.19Machines do intuitive, useful work

3.19.1How do machines and computers come into existence?

3.19.2The simplest known cells require millions of molecular machines and nanocomputers

3.19.3How did so many subcellular molecular machines come into existence?

3.19.4Spontaneous generation of a simple paper clip

3.20Probability vs. Plausibility

3.21Bioinformational Turing tapes and machines

3.21.1Software prescribes not-yet-existent formal function into existence

3.21.2Venter’s Programming of a digital organism.

3.21.3Prescription, with its programming and processing, are the most defining characteristics of life

3.22Life is a programmed, cybernetic, highly-regulated, computational process

3.23What could possibly produce subcellular information technology?

3.24Duplication plus variation. Mutations result in noise, not increased P & P

3.25Emergence

3.25.1Hypercycles

3.25.2Trial and Error Pursuits

3.25.3Oscillation models of life origin

3.26Definition of life

3.27Challenges remaining in astrobiological research

3.27.1The quandary of life origin is not complexity; it is conceptual complexity.

3.27.2Multiple layers and dimensions of Prescription are superimposed in genomes

3.27.3Queries needing answers for any naturalist model of life origin to be plausible

3.28Primordial life would have required Prescription and its Processing.

3.28.1Prescription and its Processing (P & P) are life’s most essential ingredient

3.28.2How does Choice Determinism relate to the spontaneous generation of life?

3.28.3Biological PIo is nonphysical, the same as any other PI

3.28.4Life-Origin is about the emergence of Primordial P & P

3.28.5The worship of possibility

3.28.6Still another chicken and egg paradox to life origin

3.28.7The multi-dimensional, multi-layered nature of biological prescription

3.28.8The first P & P’s were ontological, not epistemological

3.28.9We must first address the origin of PIo, before addressing the modification of existing PIo

4.Summary

5.References

6.Index

Preface

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? It doesn’t matter. Both the chicken and the egg are highly prescribed. Both are replete with extraordinary formal organization (not just the physicodynamic self-ordering that we see in chaos theory), purposefully set configurable switches, integrated circuits, computationally successful schemes, developmental plans, end-user programmable preferences, and contingency modules that prescribe appropriate responses to almost any environmental stress or opportunity. All of this genomic and epigenomic programming predates and makes happen phenotypic cells. This programming and processing alone compute and manufacture organisms with superior fitness. Environmental selection is secondary—determined only after the fact of this programming and processing at the decision-node level of genomic and epigenomic prescription.

Life pursues the goal of being and staying alive. Evolution has no goal, especially at the molecular/genetic/epigenetic programming level. Evolution is nothing more than the differential survival and reproduction of the fittest already-programmed, already-living organisms. Evolution only eliminates inferior phenotypic organisms. Evolution cannot prescribe or program.

All known life is cybernetic, meaning controlled. Life's most prominent attribute is programming and tight regulation at every turn. Yet programming, prescription, control and regulation are all formalisms, not mere physical interactions. The formal programming of life is what makes life unique. Heritable formal instructions are needed, independent of the actual phenotypic organisms, for evolution to be possible.

Metabolism-First models cannot sustain themselves as perpetual motion machines. It is not sufficient for an environment to be open to wasted solar energy. Sustained Functional Systems (SFS) are needed to convert wasted solar energy into usable energy potentials. Engines are needed to be able to use these energy potentials in an organized fashion. Selection must be made FOR (in pursuit of), not just Selection FROM AMONG in order to prescribe and process future function. Natural Selection is Selection FROM AMONG only. Evolution never Selects FOR (in pursuit of).

No reason exists why a prebiotic environment would have cared whether anything functioned. A basis for Selection FOR (in pursuit of) is completely lacking in any naturalistic abiogenesis theory. Yet programming and prescribing is impossible without selecting FOR (in pursuit of). This kind of selection is always formal, not physical.

Few answers have been published to any of the major questions posed in or by the Origin of Life Prize program, or by The First Gene: the Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control, David L. Abel, Editor, LongView Press Academic, New York, N.Y., 2011.

Prescription and programming arise only out of Decision Theory, not Stochastic Theory. How did prebiotic nature program the first decision nodes? Only Choice Determinism (CD), not Physicodynamic Determinism (PD), could possibly program a genome and epigenome.

What does naturalistic science do with the fact that the phenomena of Prescription and its Processing have never once been observed independent of agent causation? That is the topic of this book.

David L. Abel, Director

The Gene Emergence Project

Department of ProtoBioCybernetics & ProtoBioSemiotics

The Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Morris W. Hedge for editing and proof-reading this volume.

Greg McElveen once again was a joy to work with. Greg did a marvelous job at LongView Press Academic in preparing the manuscript for publication, and in overseeing its processing.

Jessie Nilo did a very nice job on cover design and graphic art and Kathy Phipps did a great job on technical editing.

Finally, the author would like to acknowledge the financial support for this work coming in the form of a grant from The Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc. An anonymous multi-millionaire donor has generously provided the funding over many years for every Gene-Emergence Project venture the Board of Directors has ever approved. The project has always focused research attention specifically on the problem of gene emergence, code-origin, and the beginning of epigenetic management. Of special interest has been the birth of programming, messaging, formal controls, and processing in a prebiotic naturalistic world.

Introduction

Life origin is not about information!

In addition, no searches were conducted in a prebiotic environment. No targets existed at which to aim; shooters were non-existent. No goals existed—no pursuits of formal organization or functionality.

Life origin is about initial Prescription, and about the Processing of that initial prescription. We are not talking about epistemology here. Epistemology pertains to the nature, scope and limits of human knowledge. Human knowledge did not exist when life began. We want to imagine how stand-alone, Ontological Prescription and its Processing (P & Po) arose in a prebiotic environment. This has nothing to do with human uncertainty, reduced uncertainty, or mutual entropy.

This book will demonstrate from many different angles that only P & Po could have generated the first formal organization, sophisticated function, and the first non-trivial useful work.

Life exhibits the highest-tech organization and integrative function known to science. The simplest-known living organism puts to shame the finest mainframe computer system in the world. Life is highly controlled, regulated, and computational. Life is fundamentally cybernetic.

How P & Po arose in inanimate nature is by far the most perplexing problem facing life-origin science. Some have argued that programming had to precede, organize, instruct, and compute life into existence. Others, realizing that prebiotic nature would have been incapable of practicing such formalisms, instead believe primordial cells self-organized spontaneously, and just emerged due to purely physical interactions.

Holders of both perspectives need desperately to critique this book. Can you vigorously defend your perspective under extensive challenge? Or is your mind fanatically made up prior to any substantive discussion? Unfortunately, many will not accept the challenge. They will instead cowardly post a one star review of this book without reading past the first page. While boasting of academic superiority, their closed minds are in fact locked shut. They are true believers in superstition, tragically, all in the name of science.

Instead of sweeping the issue of Primordial Prescription and its Processing under the rug, this entire book focuses directly on it. The highly specialized field of science that specifically addresses these questions is known as ProtoBioCybernetics. Cybernetics is the study of control and regulation. Bio, of course, refers to life. Proto addresses the emergence of initial life. Protocells would have been the very first semblance of living cells in any naturalistic scenario.

If biologists know anything at all about life, they know that every activity within even the simplest known living cell is exquisitely organized. Life is genomically and epigenomically controlled and regulated. How did that organization, prescription, processing, control and regulation of biofunction get started in inanimate nature? That is the subject of this book.

1. The Most Plaguing Problem of Life Origin Science

1.1

What exactly is Prescription?

Before we can talk about life, we have to clarify what is Prescription in everyday terms. What does it do? How is Prescription achieved? What is its nature? How is it recorded? How is it processed and employed? What are its capabilities?

All causation can be subdivided into one of these two categories: Physicodynamic causation (physical causes acting upon starting-condition constraints) and Formal causation (abstract, conceptual, non-physical, purposeful, choice-based decisions).

Prescription has nothing to do with human uncertainty, reduced uncertainty (mutual entropy), statistical combinatorialism, transmission theory, description, or human knowledge. Prescription is more than just instruction. Prescription cannot be reduced to just enumerating how something could, or should, be done. Successful prescription, as used with reference to abiogenesis (initial life origin), actually makes integrated metabolic function happen in a physical world. Prescription not only precedes in time what it prescribes, it plays the primary role of actually bringing what is prescribed into existence.

Prescription and its processing go hand in hand. Instructions are worthless if they cannot be processed. The value of a computational program requires processing to demonstrate. We cannot even be sure if a computational program will halt (successfully compute) without running it (the halting problem made famous by Alan Turing’s proof of undecidability).¹ The program must be processed to its completion to prove that its prescription is efficacious.

Causation, therefore, is the biggest issue of life origin science, not just information. Effects must be caused. Successful computation is an effect that must be programmed into existence. Programming, and its processing, is the cause. Since all known life is cybernetic (controlled and regulated), life-origin science must seek to explain how the first primordial cell (the effect) was caused (programmed and processed into existence).

Successful prescription of formal utility (usefulness) executes Prescriptive Information (PI).² Prescriptive Information is a certain kind of Functional Information (FI).³-⁷ We will address the different types of true information later. The birth of Prescription and its successful processing is the real issue of life origin science.

1.2

Prescription of what?

The next question to address is, Prescription of what? The answer is: organization, function, utility, usefulness, computational success, and intuitive pragmatic work. None of these phenomena are physical. They are all abstract, conceptual, nonphysical and formal. They can have physical manifestations. Formalisms can be instantiated into physicality. But phenomena like organization remain fundamentally formal, not physical. They are choice-based. The laws of physics can spontaneously generate order—the subject of chaos theory. But physical laws cannot possibly generate formal organization or sophisticated function (See Sections 2.10 – 2.15). It is astounding how many otherwise brilliant scientists remain blind to this simple fact.

A prebiotic environment was devoid of consciousness. Prescription could not have been programmed at decision nodes by inanimate nature. No agents existed to follow directions, either. Information, including Prescriptive Information (PI), would have been worthless with no sentience, desire, intent or choice-contingency to obey its instructions.

Function had to be valued, sought out and preserved for metabolism to organize. This is why pursuing the topic of information in life-origin science is a red herring. Abiogenesis research must address the problem of direct causation of organization and integrated function. This is what we mean in this book when we talk about Prescription and its processing. We are talking about direct causation, not just information about. The birth of both prescription and its processing is the real issue of life origin.

How did genomic and epigenomic instructions come into existence prior to any naturally selectable fittest phenotypic function, let alone living organisms? Prescription, programming and its processing arise only out of choice determinism rather than physicodynamic determinism.

Even if instructions somehow came into existence physicochemically, what would have followed (pursued and obeyed) those instructions? How did biochemical pathways, cycles, and any protometabolism get conceptually steered and organized?

Not all causes are physical. Sophisticated function/utility, even within the physical world, is always the effect of formal causation. Once again, by formal, we mean abstract, conceptual and nonphysical rather than physicodynamic or physicochemical. Formalisms always involve unconstrained choice-contingent controls. Mathematics, logic theory, computer programming, language, categorization, tabulation of results, and the drawing of scientific conclusions, are all examples of formal rather than physical causation. No naturalistic scientist can deny this. To deny nonphysical mathematical formalism is to deny physics itself. The physical laws are nearly all mathematical equations and inequalities. Measurements are formal representations of physicality, not physicality itself.⁸-¹⁸

The mathematical equations that we call laws precede and, in a certain sense, govern physicochemical interactions. Of course, the equations themselves don’t really do anything. They are just representational and descriptive of law. But the underlying Prescription behind those laws and their equations not only constrains, but controls, the unveiling of physicality. From this cosmogonic perspective, the laws were not born in the Big Bang event. The mathematical laws were prescribed prior to, and first realized physically in association with, the Big Bang event.

Cosmogony addresses the origin of the cosmos, along with the origin of its formal controls. Cosmology, on the other hand, merely presupposes the existence of the cosmos. Cosmology studies the history of the cosmos since existing, along with its current workings.

Why does physicality obey nonphysical, formal, mathematical laws? How did these formal mathematical equations come into existence? At issue is cosmogony, not cosmology.

The most fundamental principle of science is not a law of thermodynamics. It is The F > P Principle, The Formalism > Physicality Principle.19 This Principle is discussed in section 3.16.

The real problem of abiogenesis (life origin) has to do with how Prescription of formal integrated function, and the processing of that prescription, arose in a chance and necessity, mass and energy only, naturalistic world.

1.3

Information itself doesn’t do anything.

Information can be used in causation. But information is not synonymous with causation. A great deal of information can exist, both in its abstract nonphysical form, and in its instantiated physical form (e.g. in electromagnetic media of retention and transmission), with zero causation. Even when information is a factor in causation, it must be processed to contribute to that causation. The instantiated Prescriptive Information (PI)²,²⁰-²² must be acted upon for formal function to result. This processing of information renders PI an indirect contributor to the causation of formal function. Not only must the functional information itself be prescribed, but the processing concept, rules and machinery must also be prescribed.²³,²⁴

For the existence of prescription to be validated, the purpose and goal of prescription must come to fruition. Prescription, therefore, entails much more than just information.

The primary cause of PI (e.g., programming of computational function) flows ultimately from such nebulous factors as desire, intent, concept, goal, choices and plan. None of these entities are physical. They are all formal. They can only become physical causes when instantiated into physical implementations of physical causation. At that point, energy consumption inevitably becomes a factor. But in their abstract pre-physical form, the constraints of mass and energy, and the law-like orderliness of physical interactions, are irrelevant to prescription of formal function even in a material world. It is only blind belief that presupposes formalism to be an effect of physical causation. This notion is not scientifically supportable. It is also logically impossible. Physical bricks cannot construct a building on their own. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and phosphorus molecules cannot generate brain or mind on their own. Formalisms must first organize and control physical molecules for a brain or mind to come into existence. Only then can thoughts, desires, and purposeful choices come into existence.

Of special interest in this book is the prescription of sophisticated initial bio-functions in a prebiotic cosmos. To address the question, How did life begin? requires first addressing, How did prescription and its processing begin?

1.4

Information discussions lead to an epistemological quagmire

Why are information discussions a red herring in life-origin research?

Human epistemology (the study of human knowledge) is irrelevant to objective, historical, ontological life origin. Information is for potential learners and knowers.²⁵ There were no learners or knowers when life began in the cosmos.

Information is always about something. "Aboutness" is an epistemological descriptive concept, not an objective, historical, ontological cause. If there were no learners or knowers in a prebiotic environment, no epistemology existed in that environment. Ontological being did not include aboutness in an inanimate environment. Aboutness, uncertainty, knowledge, surprisal, mutual entropy, searches for targets, and understanding, therefore, are all irrelevant to the emergence of objective, ontological prescription and its processing.

If all known life is cybernetic, cybernetics (control mechanisms) had to have been programmed and processed into existence.²⁶-²⁸ Mere information about (Descriptive Information [DI],²,²⁰,²¹,²⁹ or even instructions for how to (Prescriptive Information (PI), would not have existed. Even if they had, no sentient beings existed in a prebiotic environment to understand description or instructions. We are faced with the problem of prescription and its processing having to be entirely ontological (objective), not epistemological and subjective. Yet, the prebiotic physical environment itself is logically incapable of prescribing or programming any computational function. Immediately, materialism/physicalism/naturalism as a metaphysical worldview conglomerate would seem to be untenable. How could the purely philosophic axiom, Physicality is sufficient, possibly hold true in the real world of cybernetic life? It is incumbent upon philosophic naturalists to explain and defend their metaphysical belief system, especially if they are going to try to contend so fanatically that physicalism is proven scientific fact. How could non-sentient physicality produce the readily observable ontological programming of life?

The argument that Life was much simpler then, will be deconstructed from many different angles throughout this book. The problem of Prescription and its processing applies to even the simplest Sustained Functional System (SFS)²⁹-³² (See Sections 2.4.4. and 3.11), including the simplest conceivable protocell model (remembering that protocells have to be alive, not just soap bubble-like entities illegitimately imagined to be objectively alive).

Current notions of information are confused at best. Notions of information are often so erroneous and firmly entrenched in folly, even among information theory specialists, that it becomes pointless to try to untangle the massive knot. It is like a hopelessly tangled fishing line. Just cutting bait is far wiser. The entire entangled informational nightmare needs to be trashed.

Information, including Functional Information (FI),⁴,³³-³⁸ and even the more focused concept of Prescriptive Information (PI),²,²⁰,²⁹,³⁹ are a can of worms. They both involve too heavy a dose of inseparable human epistemology. Human knowledge only beclouds the issue of what caused abiogenesis. Humans didn’t exist then. Whatever happened 3.7 billion years ago (?) had no dependence upon human consciousness.

There were no other organisms, either, in a prebiotic environment, let alone multicellular organisms. No vestige of a central nervous system existed to learn from, or be instructed by, epistemological information. Shannon uncertainty, surprisal, mutual entropy, knowledge, probability considerations, and the pursuit of targets, therefore, have nothing to do with life-origin.

The cell controls and regulates its own metabolism and survival, and had to have done so from the first primordial cell on. How do cells achieve homeostasis? Circuits of ingenious configurable switch-settings were required prior to realizable phenotypic structure and function. Physical symbol vehicles (tokens; nucleosides) had to be arranged in certain syntax according to arbitrarily selected formal rules (not laws). Three-dimensional architecture needed design and engineering for relational structure to provide formal utility (e.g. ribozyme catalysis of hundreds of crucial metabolic functions). All of these integrative functions had to be prescribed. Prescription of Function (PoF) requires abstract, choice-contingent concept and goal. Concept arises only from nonphysical formalisms, not from the chance and necessity, mass and energy, of physicality. PoF not only precedes, it causes the effect of formal utility. PoF generates phenomena such as computer programming, architectural design, engineering specs, even genomics.

Ontological PoF is a more focused subject of study in biology than Prescriptive Information (PI). Prescriptive Information (PI) is a cut above Functional Information (FI).⁴,³³-³⁸ in describing genomics and epigenomics. But, PoF surpasses even PI, because it is:

1)objective rather than subjective

2)ontological rather than epistemological

3)efficacious in actually producing cybernetic cells, rather than just instructing or describing them.

If there were no physical brains or minds in a prebiotic environment, how did inanimate nature prescribe and process the first organized bio-function? Is there something in physical law that could organize integrative bio-function? Can random heat agitation of molecules organize bio-function? Can quantum mechanics integrate macroscopic circuits and organize a protometabolism?

Which of the four known forces of physics organized and prescribed life into existence? Was it gravity? Was it the strong or weak nuclear force? Was it the electromagnetic force? How could any combination of these natural forces or force fields program decision nodes in pursuit of eventual formal utility?

Why would a prebiotic environment value, desire or seek to generate utility?

Can chance and/or necessity program or prescribe sophisticated bio-function?

Science is a human epistemological system. It is admittedly impossible to divorce our knowledge, with all of its problems, from scientific investigation. But those problems can be greatly minimized by shifting the emphasis away from uncertainty reduction in human minds into the rise of primary ontological prescription in a prebiotic environment. This becomes a matter of simple direct causation rather than a quagmire of epistemological confusion.

Science has very good ways of minimizing the human epistemological problem:

Double-blind studies

Independent groups all performing the same experiment

Conference debates

Letters to the editor

Prediction fulfillments

Universality of application of theories, laws and paradigms

Falsifiability

Many other checks and balances.

Life origin, wherever in the cosmos, is the subject of the science known as Astrobiology. We are free to imagine abiogenesis (life from nonlife) happening on earth, or on some other planet or moon in any solar system. Forget all about information for the moment. Think Causation of formal function in a physical world. How did the tokens of nucleotides get sequenced into meaningful (functional)